Quick rules question on what seemed odd to me

[gbear]

In the Eagles game last night, there was a play where two flags were thrown.

A defensive off sides was called, and Matt Ryan was called for intentional grounding. Leaving off the fact he was outside the pocket when one rewatched the replay, how can the offense be faulted for throwing the ball away because the defense left before the snap? As I was watching, I saw Philly get a free shot on Matt Ryan without having to take the penalty yards.

It just seemed like a crappy call sequence, but I wasn't sure if I was understanding everything.

 

[Elephant]

I know exactly what play you are talking about and I was thinking the same thing. Why didn't the offside play trump any subsequent penalty if it trumps any play unless the offense chooses to take the penalty? Free play, except when there is a penalty?

I also saw the play where Matt Ryan was hit and there was no call. I immediately thought about the BS call on Abraham when he tapped Vick.

I swear the NFL has handed down "quiet" mandates on certain players who seem to create more revenue.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

In the event of a defensive offsides, the offense gets a "free play" in the sense that the defense can't do anything negative to their yardage; e.g. a sack yards would not count against the team.

However, the team can't "cheat" to take advantage of this free play, meaning its not a 100% free pass. If this were the case, they could just forward pass down the field, for instance. Or the non-ball carriers could just block in the back at will.

The penalties still should have offset, meaning neither team got an advantage. If they enforced the intentional grounding, then you've got me.

 

[gbear]

They didn't enforce the grounding in terms of taking yards away. They said the penalties offset. My problem is with the intentional grounding happening as a result of the pass rusher being offsides. Isn't that supposed to be unabated to the QB? Otherwise, why not simply take the offsides 5 yards in exchange for a hit on the QB.

It just seemed odd. Ryan started the play running for his life, and on replay he was outside the tackles (a miracle missed by the ref who called intentional grounding), but he was still called for intentional grounding. It just seemed a twice blown call.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

They didn't enforce the grounding in terms of taking yards away. They said the penalties offset. My problem is with the intentional grounding happening as a result of the pass rusher being offsides. Isn't that supposed to be unabated to the QB? Otherwise, why not simply take the offsides 5 yards in exchange for a hit on the QB.

It just seemed odd. Ryan started the play running for his life, and on replay he was outside the tackles (a miracle missed by the ref who called intentional grounding), but he was still called for intentional grounding. It just seemed a twice blown call.

Yeah, if the guy was offsides and then came unblocked at Ryan, that seems like it should have been unabated. Probably just a blown call; seemed like a lot of those this week.

Sproles' TD against Chicago
Hernandez's TD against San Diego

I'm honestly surprised that the refs got the fumble call correct to end the game against AZ.

 

[Dik Shuttle]

Ugh. The NFL is quickly becoming the NBA & FIFA in regards to rules & officiating.

I don't care how you slice it. If the ball touches the ground, it's NOT a catch. Control/not control isn't the issue. In fact, if you had THAT much control, it wouldn't have touched the ground in the first place!

I think it's somehow related to gambling and being able to effect the game more directly, but don't ask me to prove that. It's just a suspicion, like hoffa being buried in the bleachers or Versace (Gianni, not Dick) being offed for being a stooley.

I'd say at least three times a game I'm in complete disagreement with not only the refs, but the rules they are enforcing....

Between that and Fantasy Football, I'm closer to quitting than ever before.